The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms may now be more influential than the United States Constitution, the New York Times reports, citing a study to be published by The New York University Law Review that shows nations around the world are no longer looking to the U.S. Constitution as a guide for their own.
(The Times provides a nifty chart that shows how the constitutions of other countries are diverging from that of the U.S.)
“The Canadian Charter is both more expansive and less absolute,” Times reporter Adam Liptak writes. “It guarantees equal rights for women and disabled people, allows affirmative action and requires that those arrested be informed of their rights. On the other hand, it balances those rights against ‘such reasonable limits’ as ‘can be demonstrably justified in a free and democratic society.'”
The piece makes note of a recent interview in which U.S. Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg said she would look to the Canadian Charter, the South African Constitution or the European Convention of Human Rights over her own country’s constitution if she were drafting one for 2012.
Adding further praise for Canada, or insult to the U.S., the former president of the Supreme Court of Israel is quoted in the story saying that “Canadian law serves as a source of inspiration for many countries around the world.”
Should we be patting ourselves on the backs for a Charter well done?